Shooting incident in Plymouth

[JohnfromUK]

1 hour ago, steve s×s said:

which idiot thought an anger management course would make or ever will make someone change their mental outlook, same goes for speed awareness

But that's what the current 'woke' brigade see as a more 'human rights aware' alternative to punishment.

[steve s×s]

7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

But that's what the current 'woke' brigade see as a more 'human rights aware' alternative to punishment.

Tell that to the poor ******* families see what they think, someone needs a serious kick up the aris 

[JohnfromUK]

1 minute ago, steve s×s said:

Tell that to the poor ******* families see what they think, someone needs a serious kick up the aris 

Oh I agree with you - but these days - the concept of 'punishment' is out of fashion - and 'compassionate rehab and re-education' is the preferred agenda.

[Gordon R]

The last couple of posts seem to hit the nail on the head.

As it stands, the old alternative would be to take away the guns and never let him have them again.

The more modern approach seems to be - he has asaulted someone and we have been forced to take his licence away. How can we get it back to him? Perhaps send him on a course and then give it back.

It is reported that the Police were afraid of being sued if they didn't return the guns. I take that with a pinch of salt.

 

 

[MARSH GUN]

4 hours ago, Gordon R said:

Sorry - I have to draw a line in the sand. 

He assaulted someone - that should have been enough to take his licence.

"they asked him to go on an anger management course". Why? So that he could control his anger and not assault another person? Or was it purely to get back his SGC. 

If that is the case, I am truly appalled. I would never have expected him to get the SGC back and I would have expected an in depth assessment to take place before it was ever considered. Given that it is alleged that the alarm was raised with the NHS and the police, just what were they thinking?

Based on the current known facts, much as I support the Police, I cannot subscribe to the view that they acted in the right way. 

I Read it was an alleged assault was he convicted.?  If he was guilty i stand corrected and would agree with your comments.

[Rob85]

1 hour ago, Gordon R said:

The last couple of posts seem to hit the nail on the head.

As it stands, the old alternative would be to take away the guns and never let him have them again.

The more modern approach seems to be - he has asaulted someone and we have been forced to take his licence away. How can we get it back to him? Perhaps send him on a course and then give it back.

It is reported that the Police were afraid of being sued if they didn't return the guns. I take that with a pinch of salt.

 

 

Thats them either trying to explain it away or going into damage limitation mode as their firearms licencing knows damn well they have been caught by the short and curlies

[dodgyrog]

On 14/08/2021 at 13:59, Gordon R said:

I find it hard to comprehend that someone who has anger issues would ever obtain a licence, let alone have it revoked and then re-instated, following an Anger Management Course. The necesssity for the Anger Management Course would ring mega alarm bells for me.  

Durham did it too!

[Dave-G]

1 hour ago, MARSH GUN said:

I Read it was an alleged assault was he convicted.?  If he was guilty i stand corrected and would agree with your comments.

I read (in the SUN I think) that he wasn't charged.

[Jim Neal]

10 hours ago, MARSH GUN said:

It seemed the Police acted in the right way, they asked Davison to go on an anger management course. And In due course returned his certificate. just the same as any of us would expect if we had complications with our Gun licences, with any of the Police forces in the country.

How the hell can you consider that being the right way for the police to manage a person's right to hold a firearms licence?  If a licence holder has got into any kind of violence-related trouble with the police such as this bloke had, it should be ticket gone for good, end of story.  That's why the UK has experienced only a handful of tragic incidents in living memory involving licenced firearms holders.

That's also why we all regularly comment on certain situations to the effect of "it's not worth losing my ticket over".

What message does it send out when a firearms licence holder commits acts of violence and subsequently overtly displays mental instability, but is then given back his right to own guns??!!! 

The system works, when implemented properly... and when not implemented properly you get the results: Plymouth 2021.  This is 100% a problem with the relevant licencing force and 0% a problem with the shooting community.  but you can bet your last button we'll get shafted once again.

I really do hope that BASC et al are working double time to counter the inevitable media backlash against legitimate gun owners.  But I bet we'll get the same feeble service we're now used to receiving from those who "represent" us.  I genuinely hope to eat humble pie on that last statement.

[clangerman]

4 minutes ago, Jim Neal said:

 

The system works, when implemented properly... and when not implemented properly you get the results: Plymouth 2021.  This is 100% a problem with the relevant licencing force and 0% a problem with the shooting community.  but you can bet your last button we'll get shafted once again.

you are 100% correct one or more persons failed to do their job properly so lives were lost truth is always simple it only gets complicated by those seeking to avoid blame 

[jan8p]

8 hours ago, Dave-G said:

I read (in the SUN I think) that he wasn't charged.

Charging is only one outcome of a crime. If he admitted the offence there are other disposal methods, restorative justice, caution, etc, none of which result in "charging" but doesn't mean he's not guilty (by admission).

[TK421]

7 hours ago, Jim Neal said:

How the hell can you consider that being the right way for the police to manage a person's right to hold a firearms licence?  If a licence holder has got into any kind of violence-related trouble with the police such as this bloke had, it should be ticket gone for good, end of story.  That's why the UK has experienced only a handful of tragic incidents in living memory involving licenced firearms holders.

That's also why we all regularly comment on certain situations to the effect of "it's not worth losing my ticket over".

What message does it send out when a firearms licence holder commits acts of violence and subsequently overtly displays mental instability, but is then given back his right to own guns??!!! 

The system works, when implemented properly... and when not implemented properly you get the results: Plymouth 2021.  This is 100% a problem with the relevant licencing force and 0% a problem with the shooting community.  but you can bet your last button we'll get shafted once again.

I really do hope that BASC et al are working double time to counter the inevitable media backlash against legitimate gun owners.  But I bet we'll get the same feeble service we're now used to receiving from those who "represent" us.  I genuinely hope to eat humble pie on that last statement.

Your spot on there Jim, I’d also add let’s hope all other representing bodies of this sport including the CPSA get involved in this and sort things out surrounding the antiquated inconsistent system of license application/renewal and review. 

[Newbie to this]

4 people shot in Camden over the weekend.

[Cranfield]

Just now, Newbie to this said:

4 people shot in Camden over the weekend.

Almost guarantee that not one licensed weapon was involved.

[Newbie to this]

Just now, Cranfield said:

Almost guarantee that not one licensed weapon was involved.

That's why it's not plastered all over the news

[Lord v]

Home Office preparing new guidance to be issued with advice to check applicants social media. Apparently this was suggested in the 2019 review but nothing was actually drafted or enacted. 

 

 Hastily drafted guidance can't possibly go badly. 

 

Plymouth shootings: Police asked to review gun licence process - BBC News

[captainhastings]

Just heard on the news they want to push for social media checks so how would that work. People snooping through your private chats with family and friend etc? He should not have been given his guns back. So some one did not do there job properly its as simple as that. People make mistakes we are only human 

Edited August 16, 2021 by captainhastings

[Rob85]

2 minutes ago, captainhastings said:

Just heard on the news they want to push for social media checks so how would that work. People snooping through your private chats with family and friend etc? He should not have been given his guns back. So some one did not do there job properly its as simple as that. People make mistakes we are only human 

Probably be a general look through social media, If you have it set to maximum privacy it should require a warrant to check(hack) it. But I suppose this will be home office guidance that they will interpret as compulsory. Dont agree to us snooping then you don't get a licence sorta thing. I can't see them having the manpower to do this level of snooping without doubling the price of a licence to cover wages of more staff.

Most people that are putting extreme views on social media will want people to see it though to find like minded idiots 

[Lord v]

5 minutes ago, captainhastings said:

Just heard on the news they want to push for social media checks so how would that work. People snooping through your private chats with family and friend etc? He should not have been given his guns back. So some one did not do there job properly its as simple as that. People make mistakes we are only human 

its a valid question - Whilst I am perfectly happy for the police to search my name on FB and Instagram both are private so all they can seen is my profile picture and the fact I am married. About as useful as a chocolate fireguard. I guess that my screen name is relatively consistent across forums so if I provide that then they can knock themselves out. But as a child of the internet age I have a huge number of forum memberships going back decades, I couldn't even list them even if I tried and more than a few are tied to a now dead email account. I mean hell, I had a MySpace page... really regretting my Rage Against the Machine music choice on that now... 😆  

I won't be turning my password over to them, even if I could remember. 

So what exactly would this achieve - absolutely nadda. 

[steve s×s]

11 hours ago, dodgyrog said:

Durham did it too!

Yeh that was Rowhule moat another nut job probably on dope 🤪

[Newbie to this]

34 minutes ago, Lord v said:

Home Office preparing new guidance to be issued with advice to check applicants social media. Apparently this was suggested in the 2019 review but nothing was actually drafted or enacted. 

 

 Hastily drafted guidance can't possibly go badly. 

 

Plymouth shootings: Police asked to review gun licence process - BBC News

How many will just delete their social media accounts?

[GHE]

29 minutes ago, Lord v said:

its a valid question - Whilst I am perfectly happy for the police to search my name on FB and Instagram both are private so all they can seen is my profile picture and the fact I am married. About as useful as a chocolate fireguard. I guess that my screen name is relatively consistent across forums so if I provide that then they can knock themselves out. But as a child of the internet age I have a huge number of forum memberships going back decades, I couldn't even list them even if I tried and more than a few are tied to a now dead email account. I mean hell, I had a MySpace page... really regretting my Rage Against the Machine music choice on that now... 😆  

I won't be turning my password over to them, even if I could remember. 

So what exactly would this achieve - absolutely nadda. 

Government departments (and others) have software that will show them everything they want to see, including all deleted content. If it helps to identify people who cause danger to others without causing more problems to the rest of us, then bring it on.

[old'un]

I have been watching the news this morning and the only people who are being interviewed are for the most saying the application process for shotguns needs to be tightened, watching the interview with the former Northumbria chief constable Sue Sim, she made it perfectly clear where she stands, she would like shotguns moved to FAC and the application process made a lot harder with fewer guns in the hands of the public.

The annoying part of all this was, there was not one person interviewed that was pro gun ownership, if there was, I did not see/hear them.

Where are our orgs? We need some balance in these interviews.

[WalkedUp]

All, Harnser has created a specific thread to discuss licensing implications in tandem with but separate to this thread, which includes much detail of the distressing events of Plymouth. 

[hodge911]

8 minutes ago, old'un said:

I have been watching the news this morning and the only people who are being interviewed are for the most saying the application process for shotguns needs to be tightened, watching the interview with the former Northumbria chief constable Sue Sim, she made it perfectly clear where she stands, she would like shotguns moved to FAC and the application process made a lot harder with fewer guns in the hands of the public.

The annoying part of all this was, there was not one person interviewed that was pro gun ownership, if there was, I did not see/hear them.

Where are our orgs? We need some balance in these interviews.

Your correct mate there was no body supporting our side in the slightest .... 

Makes you think why the heck do we pay our fee's to our "so called helping organisation's " there has been No sight or sound of them .

The presenter on TV who interviewed the Northumbria police woman brought up roal moat who shot and killed 1 and wounded 2 with a shotgun but he never mentioned the FACT that his gun was not held legally ..

More bias reporting !!!!!!!

Edited August 16, 2021 by hodge911